Subject: Re: [boost] New libraries implementing C++11 features in C++03
From: Lorenzo Caminiti (lorcaminiti_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-11-24 15:21:41
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Hartmut Kaiser
>> Personally, if boost local was accepted I would expect to use it for a
>> year or so, until I could assume people I work with all had decent C++11
>> compilers, and then drop it for lambdas. I'm never going to start using
>> boost::phoenix in code I share with other people.
> Great, do that. Boost.Local has not to be in Boost in order for this plan to
This statement can be interpreted in many ways some of which are not
fair at all to a library under review and never mentioned on the Boost
review process... for a library not to be accepted so a user's "plan"
of using Boost in some "way" will not "succeed". Which admission
criteria is this...
Can you please clarify your statement? Which "plan" is not to succeed
by preventing Boost.Local from being accepted?
I'd really appreciate you clarifying this.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk